[Peace-discuss] Democrats' plan to fund the war

[C. G. Estabrook]

On "AWARE on the Air" (Tues. 10pm, cable ch. 6) this week, Linda Webber reported 
on Speaker Pelosi's plan to continue funding the war well into the next 
administration -- nearly $100 billion for 2008 plus nearly $70 billion more for 
2009.

This Democratic Congress was elected in 2006 to end the occupation, not fund it: 
  68% of Americans now want to bring US troops home within six months -- up from 
54% last September. These views are even beginning to show through our purposely 
sclerotic electoral system: on Tuesday, the conservative voters in Mississippi's 
1st CD elected a Democrat, Travis Childers, at least in part because he promised 
to bring the troops home from Iraq.

Pelosi's plan ran into some difficulty in the House today, but only because the 
government knows the Democrats will finally support the funding in the form that 
the administration wants it -- i.e., without the face-saving decorations (e.g., 
extended unemployment insurance) the Democrats had added. So 132 Republicans 
merely voted "present" and allowed the bill to fail. But 147 Democrats and 2 
Republicans (Ron Paul & John Duncan of Tenn.) voted against it (which is good), 
but 85 Democrats and 56 Republicans (including Tim Johnson) voted for it (which 
isn't). Here's the roll call: <http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll328.xml>.

In fact, parts of the bill were sent on to the Senate, where most probably the 
funding will be added back in (and the decorations removed).  But our 
Congressional representatives should be reminded not to vote for war.  --CGE